Whoever speaks, is to do so as one who is speaking the utterances of God; whoever serves is to do so as one who is serving by the strength which God supplies; so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:11)

Monday, August 27, 2012

When novices try to act like they know what they're doing

I am pro choice. I've been posting on a few of the pictures on this group for the past hour or so. I've tried to remain as civil as possible and provide reliable sources for my information. I do not wish to start trouble with anyone of you, but I urge you to look your methods of argumentation and generalizations. I think both pro-choice and anti-choice individuals can agree on certain topics (adoption, better sex education, wider availability of contraception, etc). Anyway, I'm posting on this wall because I'm curious about a specific scenario. I've seen many anti choice individuals with differing opinions when it comes to pregnancies that are a result of rape and incest. But I've yet to get a solid opinion on how you all feel about abortions in the case of fetuses with Anencephaly. If you could share your views, I would appreciate it. Thanks!

Liz Davidsonyou need to look up "Nicolas Coke" a little boy born with that condition and, as of July this year, is still alive. And who can say whether or not the child would have an impaired quality of life? At least allow children with this condition a chance to survive.

"A baby born with anencephaly is usually blind, deaf, unconscious, and unable to feel pain. Although some individuals with anencephaly may be born with a rudimentary brain stem, the lack of a functioning cerebrum permanently rules out the possibility of ever gaining consciousness. Reflex actions such as breathing and responses to sound or touch may occur."

Coline HayWhy do you think that Nicolas Coke or other fetuses and babies with Anencephaly should be given a chance at life if science confirms they can never achieve personhood? They are only able to function in the most primitive sense, and only with life support.

Matt CorreiaNo matter how impaired, he or she would still be a person and in my opinion should be treated as such. They don't usually live past two years, so is it that much of a burden for that time, or would parents really rather abort it right away, giving it no chance of survival?

Dee HamiltonWhat is the Prognosis for a Child With Anencephaly?The prognosis for a child with anencephaly is extremely poor. Because the child lacks much of their brain, they will not be able to think, feel, or experience consciousness. Newborn anencephalic children are usually deaf and blind, and they cannot feel pain. While anencephalic newborn infants may be able to breathe or respond to touch or sound, they are not actually consciously reacting to these stimuli; the reaction is involuntary and comes from the brain stem, the oldest part of the brain at the base of the neck.

Children born with anencephaly are only expected to live a few hours, days, or weeks. Seventy-five percent of anencephalic births are still births, while the remaining 25 percent of infants die shortly thereafter.

Coline HayBut what is the point of it surviving? It is literally doing just that-surviving. It will never be able to "live", in terms of how we view life. It cannot think or feel. It cannot even feel love.

Matt CorreiaWhile it may not "feel" the tangible things we can feel, I personally believe it still has a soul that can feel love. And when it's the baby's time to go (naturally), then that was its time. It should not be up to us to end its life just because we don't think it's experiencing life normally.

What precisely does this sentence mean?How can science measure personhood? What is personhood made of? What is its atomic weight? Of what elements is it composed?What experiments have been done to determine how much personhood a given product of human sexual reproduction contains?

Coline HayYou're right, science cannot prove personhood. Definitely misspoke there. But personhood is generally thought of as consciousness- self awareness, the ability to think and experience, the ability to feel some sort of emotion. But these fetuses and babies don't have the level of cognition necessary to truly have consciousness.

By whom? Atheistic naturalists? Certainly not by Christians. Atheistic naturalists need to give us a reason to think they're right and we're wrong about personhood. Do you know how you could go about proving that?

\\ But these fetuses and babies don't have the level of cognition necessary to truly have consciousness.\\

Coline Hay‎"By whom? Atheistic naturalists? Certainly not by Christians. Atheistic naturalists need to give us a reason to think they're right and we're wrong about personhood. Do you know how you could go about proving that?"

Abolish Human AbortionWhat is your argument that we should listen to those "many philosophers"? According to many others, that is not the case. How do we decide?And I'm afraid it IS about atheism or Christianity. If Christianity is true, all humans are made in the image of God and are of the same value, regardless of their IQ, abilities, and skill set.If atheism is true, humans are molecules in motion. There exists literally no objective reason to be kind to any human. There is also no reason to be mean and nasty to them. Nothing matters if atheism is true, including the idea that atheism is true.

Coline HayOkay, fetuses and babies with Anencephaly tend to have just a brain stem. The brain stem consists of the following:

"Midbrain/ Mesencephalon- the rostral part of the brain stem, which includes the tectum and tegmentum. It is involved in functions such as vision, hearing, eyemovement, and body movement. The anterior part has the cerebral peduncle, which is a huge bundle of axons traveling from the cerebral cortex through the brain stem and these fibers (along with other structures) are important for voluntary motor function.

Pons- part of the metencephalon in the hindbrain. It is involved in motor control and sensory analysis... for example, information from the ear first enters the brain in the pons. It has parts that are important for the level of consciousness [note that consciousness is this sense is different than what we are talking about] and for sleep. Some structures within the pons are linked to the cerebellum, thus are involved in movement and posture.

Medulla Oblongata- this structure is the caudal-most part of the brain stem, between the pons and spinal cord. It is responsible for maintaining vital body functions, such as breathing and heartrate."

Dee Hamilton‎"They don't usually live past two years,so is it that much of a burden for that time" Matt Correia. @Matt-For some, Yes. Tell me Matt, are you going to be sharing that burden with these parents? Didn't think so.

Coline HayAnd if they want that baby, they can have it. They can love it all they want until it dies, if they so choose. But I wanted to know whether or not people who identify as anti-choice think that aborting a fetus with Anencephaly is acceptable. The answer I'm getting so far is no, and from a Christian standpoint.

Abolish Human AbortionBut no, if you meant those who identify as abolitionists and anti-abortion, it is never justifiable to abort a child just because he has a disease.Were you perfect when you were born? In perfect health? Not ANYthing wrong with you at all? How do we decide the cut-off point for when a baby is imperfect enough that it's OK to murder him in his mother's womb?

Abolish Human AbortionI think she wants to say that someone who takes a lot of medicine isn't a person. She decided. Apparently she thinks she has authority and power to tell other people they're not people at all, because they take too many medications.

Liz Davidsonby that reasoning Coline, my dad wasn't a person as he had to take meds to control his diabetes, my mother neither nor my uncle as they both take medication for epilepsy! Even I have to take meds for hayfever and allergies are we not persons too?this debate is becoming silly!

Coline HayAll this debate has proven to me is that the anti choice people I encountered have a tendency to misinterpret evidence, put words in my mouth, and use Christianity as opposed to science to back up claims.

Liz Davidsonwhen did I ever mention religion? I gave you an example of how you could be wrong about this condition and all you've tried to do is rubbish it with ad hominums against sufferers. This is becoming silly. And you alluded to the fact that because Nicolas takes a lot of meds he has no quality of life, I merely pointed out that not everyone who takes a lot of meds has no quality of life!

Abolish Human Abortion‎\\I have already answered your questions with scientific evidence, while you have only backed up your statements and questions with religion.\\

This is clearly false.For one thing, you have ASSUMED your scientific evidence is relevant, not proved it.You have not answered my questions about it.I have made no points, actually, bur instead have asked you questions, most of which you have not even addressed. You have additionally demonstrated marked ignorance of the relevance of your presuppositions, and thus of ignorance of philosophy.

You can try to sum it all up in your biased way, but why haven't you used your time to answer my questions instead?Besides, if God is real, why wouldn't He be a higher standard for truth than inductive experiments? I bet yopu're not even familiar with the problem of induction.

Abolish Human AbortionIt's also kind of pathetic how you say "anti-choice" so glibly without bothering to define it or give us a reason why it should apply to us. You're anti-choice with respect to all sorts of things too, so maybe we should just call each other anti-choice.Your simplistic views lead to absurdity.

Abolish Human AbortionYou mean her right to choose to murder her child.You're anti-choice too.The state “forces” us all to do or not do all sorts of things, such as:

not rape, even if someone really really wants todrive at or under the speed limitrefrain from firebombing legal places of businesspay taxesetc.Unless you’re a consistent and total anarchist, you don’t have a problem with the state “forcing” its will on its citizens in some cases. The question is not whether morality will be imposed, but which morality will be imposed.

Liz Davidson‎"Nicolas Coke takes a great amount of medication every day." Clearly this is argument in support of your stance that all babies with this condition should be aborted, alluding (or if you prefer insinuating, means you never actually said it but it looks like it) that people who take a lot of medication have no quality of life. I ask you again when did /I/ use religion?

Noel BryantYou are both twisting Coline's words and making this argument impossible because of how defensive you are of your own beliefs. You cannot factor religion into this because not everyone has the same religion.Coline is merely saying that a parent should have the ability to choose abortion for these specific reasons. She's not saying they should be aborted.

Liz Davidsonif thats the definition of ant-choice (and I will look it up) then I have no choice other than to accept it. However I don't believe Anti-choice means that nor do I believe we fall under that category, we merely take 1 option out of the equation!

Liz Davidsonthen say that. And you haven't properly answered my second question, if you were referring to AHA only then again say it as I have commented on this post to and could gather that "you" was referring to me to! However right or wrong it was, Coline!

Noel Bryant‎"Not everyone has the same idea of math." That has to be one of the most ridiculous, far-fetched comparisons I have ever heard. Math is universal and consistent to a degree. You cannot compare it to religion because they're both based on completely different things. It's like comparing apples and monkeys. It doesn't work like that.

Noel BryantI don't know whether God exists or not, but obviously I'm not going to be convinced by a Bible verse. How about this: 2+2=4. Take two apples. Add another two apples to them. Count the apples. You should have four. If you don't have four, you messed up somewhere along the way.

Abolish Human AbortionHow do you know that this is always the case? Have you examined EVERY TIME someone took two apples and added two more, and what happened? Doesn't the universe evolve and change? How do you know that 2+2 will equal 4 one minute from now?

Ally WaufleAHA you're confusing atheism with nihilism. Nihilism is a philosophical belief; that everything means nothing. An atheist just believes that there is no god; not that there isn't a purpose to life. Yes, there sometimes is a correlation between the two, but it's not fair to say that all atheists believe in nothing. I believe this is where the debate became muddled and too opinionated.

Glenn AlexanderAHA- I would assume it unnecessary to prove to you that meaning exists. By the mere fact that you are understanding these words, they have meaning. As an atheist, my claim would be closer to: "Meaning is a subjective experience. Something only has meaning if it means something TO SOMEONE. In the absence of consciousness, there is no meaning".

And it can be proven trivially that 2+2=4 (just add 2 things to 2 other things). To prove that this always has, is, and will continue to be true? Well, that's a little beyond my expertise. I seriously doubt anyone here would understand the answer. I believe Bertrand Russell may have written on this?

Noel BryantNow prove to me that God exists with an argument that doesn't require some foundation of belief already. (Like the Bible. You cannot prove God exists to me with the Bible because the Bible was not written by God. It was written by people. People are human. They can be wrong.)

Chris MinorNext, there is no proof that god exists, much less the version of the judah christian god. The only "proof" is written in the Bible, which was written by a bunch of people who in fact never met jesus, as such how would they know that god exists, and if god did exist wouldnt he have smited all the non believers, because in the bible it says that god is a jealous god and that man would worship no other, yet other religions exist and all the atheists are still alive and I am alive as well, so that means that either god has gone soft and its not all powerful as people claim him to be, or he doesnt exist. I go for the latter one, because that is the most probable situation. Secondly, no one has the right to choose if a child exists or not except for the mother, and possibly the father. Because in fact a child is a combination of the mothers and fathers DNA, and if they do not want their offspring to live, then thats their decision, and they should not be punished for it. We could look through history and say "hey wouldnt it have been better if this person didnt exist??" This could be made for many mass murderers throughout history, or other unsavory people. However, because this is all speculation, you will not take it seriously.

Ally WaufleI am an atheist and I believe in love, friendship, the individual, and existence. There are many authors, which are atheists, and portray similar feelings in their works. IE hemingway, sartre, etc. ironically enough, kierkegaard who was christian, is considered by many, the father of existentialism and nihilism.

Ally WaufleIf there is no God (which is a possibility), I would say almost everybody to live has had a 'meaningful' existence. And vice versa if there is a God. Meaning to life has nothing to do with one's religious affiliations but with who they are as an individual. It's all subjective.

So you could be wrong about 2+2=4 and everything you claim to know, couldn't you?Don't talk anymore until you've read the resource I linked you to showing that God exists; else you just waste everyone's time.

See, this is silly, and that's why I"m posting it. Requiring evidence for God's existnece is silly too. It is a necessary truth. He is a necessary being.Do yourself a favor and actually read the arguments. Since you people don't seem very interseted in following the convo, I'll post them again.http://abolishhumanabortion.com/faq/#god-does-not-exist

Jamie WersalMeaning in life without god can mean anything to different people. Atheism does not lead to nihilism, but it CAN lead to humanism. As an agnostic, I take meaning from trying to make a difference in the life of someone else. If indeed there is no god, there is no eternal life after we die, so we have to make the most of the one that we have and try to improve everyone else's short visit on this planet.

Noel BryantYou can't prove that's something's subjective simply because of that. It's subjective. Your arguments are ridiculous! You're not proving your point anymore than you're accusing us of not proving ours. Based off of what you're saying, your "proof" that God exists is an assertion, too.

Noel BryantThey imply that because we exist, God is the one that created us, but nowhere does it actually prove it was GOD and not something else. All of your 'proof' is based on the assumption that God is the only possible being that could have created us, and your only proof of that specifically comes from the Bible... which is based off of people.

Noel BryantYou cannot prove meaning. It varies from person to person, which is why you cannot regulate it. If you didn't believe meaning existed, it would not change the fact that someone else does believe meaning exists. It wouldn't make their life any less meaningful. There's nothing you can argue there.

Jamie WersalAHA- I can't prove it because different people find meaning (or lack of it) in different ways. I stated that. But based on what you are saying, if there was no God, it would be very likely that you would go on a spree of killing, theft, and rape because without a God there is nothing to stop you from doing so. You argue that humans have no sense of guilt or empathy and are only behaving because we fear burning in hell for all of eternity (or suffering in whatever it is that you define as hell).

Oh, OK. So if someone is living a lie, in a fantasy, it doesn't make their life less meaningful.Of course, you're assuming meaning exists, which is the very question at hand.Don't assert it. Show it. Prove it.

Abolish Human Abortion‎\\ But based on what you are saying, if there was no God, it would be very likely that you would go on a spree of killing, theft, and rape because without a God there is nothing to stop you from doing so.\\

Noel Bryant‎"But based on what you are saying, if there was no God, it would be very likely that you would go on a spree of killing, theft, and rape because without a God there is nothing to stop you from doing so.\\

Abolish Human AbortionAnd um, that should be YOUR favorite word too. After all, the atheists here asked me to prove God exists, which you all know is true but won't admit.Clearly, though, y'all don't care about proving things b/c all you have done is assert.

Noel BryantAnd you can't say that I didn't accurately reflect their content. The only way all of the arguments work is if God is indeed the only possible answer to the question of the creator of the universe. That's the ONLY way. It's based off of that assumption and it doesn't prove that assumption.

Joshua Turner‎Abolish Human Abortion-I see at one point in this discussion you got caught up in an argument about evolution and stated that you can't prove 2+2=4. I hate to admit it, but they got you to make a mistake there, of course you can prove that 2+2=4, but that has nothing to do with an argument about evolution.

The essential flaw when arguing with evolutionists: What it comes down to is science and faith. Science is simply observations, we observe the world around us to discover how things work. When we can actually touch, see, hear, smell, taste,

it becomes undeniable fact. Religion does not work that way. We can't use our normal senses to observe God. I believe in God because I choose to believe. That is faith. Evolutionists argue that I need to prove God exists with scientific fact. This is fundamentally wrong, as religion is not a matter of scientific fact, but rather a matter of faith. Evolution on the other hand is supposed to be a science. As a science it should be observable in one way or another, yet nobody has ever observed it. Instead it is in fact not a true science, but rather a scientific theory. A scientific theory is really nothing more than an educated guess, based on scientific observations. Since nobody has ever observed evolution, to believe in it becomes nothing but a matter of FAITH. In short, belief in God or belief in evolution both require faith.

Noel BryantThere's nothing wrong with believing God exists. I actually think religion is essential to the world. I'm merely saying you cannot tell me that those links are PROOF that God exists because the arguments are flawed.

Why are you quoting a book made by man? And lets think for a moment shall we? If god is real, then so are the Greek gods. And the gods of ancient culture ie. Egyptian, and Nordic. Who is to say that they aren't real? Because that book says?

Come on... That's rediculous. Religion is the most used reason for every war and era of destruction. It is manipulative and emotionally destructive. Not once have I met a religious person that was devout and non judgemental at the same time. It breeds negativity.

‎"But based on what you are saying, if there was no God, it would be very likely that you would go on a spree of killing, theft, and rape because without a God there is nothing to stop you from doing so." How so?? Religion is not what does

this its law. Thomas Hobbes wrote a fantastic book called The Leviathan, which he says that human life is nasty brutish and short, and we give up some freedoms for law to happen, not religion, but law. In fact it is more likely that without religion that there would be less murders and other things of that nature. How many people have killed other people in the name of their god?? How about the crusades. If religion didnt exist then they wouldnt have been started. There might of been other reasons but definitely not because of the differences in peoples religions. In fact most of the discrimination that happens is religious persecution. "OH NO this guy has a different belief system than me, blast him" The majority of the Puritan colonies were founded because of religious persecution, and because of all the persecution, that is why the US decided to separate church and State, and to allow religious freedom through the first amendment. Now as much as this argument is fun, Roe vs Wade is LAW, and as such the right to abortions is approved by the US, and to not approve of the US is to be unAmerican. So that means that people that are against abortions are unAmerican.

Just like those who fought to abolish slavery in America before 1865 were unAmerican too, I guess.That's just a foolish thing to say. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for saying something so ridiculous.

Joshua TurnerYou aren't getting any argument from me on that point. I can be sure God exists because I feel his presence, see the world He created, talk to Him through prayer, but someone who has no faith in God can not experience these things. You can't prove God's existence through science.

Abolish Human AbortionWell, sure, not through science, but there's more to proving stuff than just science. Science is incredibly limited in its exploratory and explanatory power. It can't prove that science is a valid way of knowing stuff, for example.

Noel Bryant‎"Well, sure, not through science, but there's more to proving stuff than just science. Science is incredibly limited in its exploratory and explanatory power. It can't prove that science is a valid way of knowing stuff, for example."

Nah,

of course not, but BELIEVING something is totally a valid way of knowing something. If you're given a book on a it and thousands of people follow it, it must be true. Why else would they? And of course, because YOU believe it, you must be right. There is no other possible way. GOD forbid...

Joshua Turner‎Abolish Human AbortionScience is limited, but so is man. If you are trying to prove something to man, we are limited to what is observable. Anything we can't observe we can't be sure of. The wonderful thing is that when we have faith, God gives us the ability to observe Him, albeit still in a limited fashion, since we could not withstand His full presence.

Joshua Turner‎Abolish Human Abortionlol, to put it simply: You can't prove God exists to someone unless they have already chosen to believe. Good thing God can use us to help guide people to that belief, or nobody could be saved.

Abolish Human AbortionAnd so Noel Bryant chooses to leave zero doubt about her folly.I'm going to ban her now, but I'll post this entire thread on my blog and then I'll post the URL here. FB will send all her foolish comments to the spam filter once she is banned, unfortunately.